<?php
/**
 * <https://y.st./>
 * Copyright © 2018 Alex Yst <mailto:copyright@y.st>
 * 
 * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
 * (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
 * along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org./licenses/>.
**/

$xhtml = array(
	'<{title}>' => 'Expanding my plans',
	'<{body}>' => <<<END
<section id="Minetest">
	<h2>Minetest log</h2>
	<p>
		I&apos;d been trying to avoid defining the same bonus ability for two items that share an element so there&apos;s a difference to each possible deck configuration, though I&apos;d been allowing reuse of bonus abilities between items that are mutually exclusive in their elemental ties.
		It just occurred to me though that all tools have wooden handles.
		Each tool, even tools of the same type, needs a different bonus ability, now that support for multiple element affinities in a single item is supported.
		This is going to be a pain.
		I think I&apos;m going to try for unique abilities all around though, which is even more of a pain.
		I guess this proof-of-concept release will let me gage how much interest there is in this sort of thing.
		Am I the only person that wants this?
		Probably, but we&apos;ll see.
		At least I don&apos;t have to define all the item bonuses at once.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="visit">
	<h2>Visit</h2>
	<p>
		I visited with my mother for most of the non-work portion of my day.
		I&apos;ll go back tomorrow, too.
		It seems her iPhone&apos;s been doing ridiculous things, taking seconds-long videos every time she tells it to take a basic photograph.
		She sometimes remembers to specifically tell it not to do that, but it deletes that setting each time she goes to take a new photo.
		I thought it was because the developers at Apple are trying to push this seconds-long video feature that they&apos;re for some reason proud of, and they don&apos;t care that many people are (I&apos;d assume) bothered by it.
		She pointed to a much more-likely cause though: Apple&apos;s been trying to rent her iCloud storage space.
		This stupid feature that she doesn&apos;t even want, and I&apos;m not sure who would, it probably turning itself on to use up all her local storage space so she&apos;ll rent cloud storage space and make the company even more.
		I think I figured out how to disable it for good though.
		I&apos;m not sure why the developers added that option, even though they did hide it.
		Maybe to seem less devious?
		Anyway, I tried to back her photos up to her desktop machine today for her, but her pocket computer and desktop computer stopped speaking to each other after a while.
		Hopefully they&apos;ll be working again tomorrow so I can finish the job.
	</p>
</section>
END
);
